-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 901
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closing negotiations too restrictive #435
Comments
A new development! I now get
on attempted reconnect from peer-a to peer-b |
after restarting again, I get a new error when attempting a reconnect:
|
Ok so peer-a is failing in This isn't helpful, I'll do some debugging on peer-b |
This handles the case where peer->error is sometimes an empty string Fixes ElementsProject#435
This handles the case where peer->error is sometimes an empty string Fixes ElementsProject#435
This handles the case where peer->error is sometimes an empty string Fixes ElementsProject#435
OK, so, the error in these cases is "Final fee 362 vs 329 at limits 363-535". @Roasbeef previously reported that we're far too restrictive in our closing negotiations. But even if we are, we should be dropping to chain in this case, and closing that way. Plus a nicer error report when this happens... |
#847 should have fixed this issue I think? Or are there more things attached to this issue? |
I'll close this for now until it pops up again |
I have been attempting to open and successfully close a testnet transaction between two of my computers. So far I got to the point where both computers successfully open a channel and are in the CHANNELD_NORMAL state. As a test, I tried a mutual close of the channels with
lightning-cli close
peer-b-id from peer-a. This put both peers in the CLOSINGD_SIGEXCHANGE state. I've done this twice and I've never been able to get it out of this state.After restarting both nodes, I tried to reconnect to peer-b from peer-a (
02058ea66978d2e5c346642c45f3cec5a4c733897b59244fc29c3107e844f62608
), I get this on peer-b:Error is :
Final fee 362 vs 329 at limits 363-535
and then peer-a just hangs. also, "we sent them a fatal error" doesn't seem to be true, since a fatal error is not reported to peer-a. possibly related: #405
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: